Petitioners Say Furniture Exception to AD Mattress Order Doesn't Cover Foldable Mattresses

Antidumping duty petitioners led by Brooklyn Bedding argued on Sept. 25 that foldable mattresses from exporters PT Ecos Jaya Indonesia and PT Grantec Jaya Indonesia don't qualify for an exception to the AD order on mattresses from Indonesia for multifunctional furniture (PT Ecos Jaya Indonesia v. United States, CIT Consol. # 24-00001).

In the 2021-22 review of the AD order, Commerce said the foldable mattresses were exempt since the mattresses themselves can serve as a mattress and frame and the exclusion doesn't require the frame to be made of any particular material. In response, Brooklyn Bedding said that interpretation violates the scope's plain language and "eliminates a critical requirement of the exclusion" -- that the mattresses "be integrated into furniture framing."

Under the agency's interpretation, "all mattresses that have the capacity to be folded could satisfy the multifunctional furniture exclusion because all mattresses have a cover." This violates the petitioners' intent in creating the scope of the order and also is "inconsistent with the Department's own scope analysis from the underlying investigation," which said a foldable mattress was within the scope of the order.

Brooklyn Bedding added that Commerce's claims regarding the material of the mattresses "misses the point." While the multifunctional furniture may use framing made from various materials, "the multifunctional furniture exclusion requires the product to have 'furniture framing,'" the brief said. A mattress cover isn't a piece of furniture framing but rather a "necessary component making up a finished mattress."

In the case, the U.S. requested a voluntary remand to reconsider its decision to use the financial statements of one surrogate to calculate Ecos' constructed value, selling expense and export price profit (see 2408130041). While those claims from Ecos play out, Brooklyn Bedding is making its separate arguments against the agency's scope finding.

The petitioner also claimed that Ecos' tri-folding mattresses are "advertised, marketed, and function as mattresses, not toppers." The tri-folding mattresses are "mattresses; they are not toppers insofar as they do not function as a supplement to a mattress," the brief said.